Umeå University's logo

Background: There is limited experience in combining interdisciplinary rehabilitation for persons with dementia and caregiver support.

Aim: To explore how informal caregivers perceive participation in a person-centred, multidimensional, interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme targeting community-dwelling older adults with dementia and their informal caregivers, and how the programme has influenced their everyday life.

Material and Methods: Fourteen informal caregivers, aged 45–84 years, participated in a qualitative interview following a randomised controlled pilot study. Transcribed interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results: The analysis resulted in seven categories and three themes: feelingchallenged and boostedto face an uncertain future, perceiving supportive activities as sources ofbothjoy and frustration in everyday life and finding relief in recognising their relative’s former self.

Conclusions and Significance: Combining interdisciplinary rehabilitation for adults with dementia with education and support for caregivers was perceived as viable and valuable for the informal caregivers. They felt strengthened by the rehabilitation and better prepared for their uncertain future. However, participation also challenged everyday routines, but the benefits appeared to outweigh the strain.

Background: A team-based, individualised rehabilitation approach may be required to meet the complex needs of people with dementia. This randomised controlled pilot trial evaluated the feasibility of a person-centred multidimensional interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme for community-dwelling older people with dementia and their informal primary caregivers.

Methods: Participants with dementia were randomised to an intervention group (n = 31, mean age (SD) 78.4 (6.0) years) or usual care (n = 30, mean age 79.0 (7.1)). The rehabilitation programme consisted of a 20-week rehabilitation period containing assessments and interventions based on each individual’s goals, and group-based physical exercise plus social interaction twice a week for 16 weeks at a rehabilitation unit. After 5 and 14 months, the interdisciplinary team followed up participants over two four-week periods. For both groups, dates of deaths and decision to move to nursing home over three years, as well as interventions for the relevant periods, were collected. Blinded assessors measured physical functions, physical activity, activities of daily living, cognitive functions, nutritional status, and neuropsychiatric symptoms at baseline and at 5, 12, 24, and 36 months.

Results: Participants in the intervention group received a mean of 70.7 (20.1) interventions during the 20-week rehabilitation period, delivered by all ten team professions. The corresponding figures for the control group were 5.8 (5.9). In the intervention group, all but one participated in rehabilitation planning, including goal setting, and attendance in the exercise and social interaction groups was 74.8%. None of the adverse events (n = 19) led to any manifest injury or disease. Cox proportional hazard regression showed a non-significant lower relative risk (HR = 0.620, 95% CI 0.27–1.44) in favour of the intervention for moving to nursing home or mortality during the 36-month follow-up period. Linear mixed-effect models showed non-significant but potentially clinically meaningful between-group differences in gait, physical activity, and neuropsychological symptoms in favour of the intervention.

Conclusions: The rehabilitation programme seems feasible among community-dwelling older people with dementia. The overall results merit proceeding to a future definitive randomised controlled trial, exploring effects and cost-effectiveness. One could consider to conduct the programme earlier in the course of dementia, adding cognitive training and a control attention activity.

Trial registration: The study protocol, ISRCTN59155421, was registered online 4/11/2015.

Background: Physical activity and sedentary behavior vary across the life span, and in very old people activity behavior can vary considerably over 24 h. A physical activity questionnaire adapted for this age group is lacking. This study was conducted to validate such a newly developed questionnaire suitable for use in very old people.

Research question: Is the International Physical Activity Questionnaire adapted for adults aged ≥ 80 years (IPAQ-E 80 +) a valid measure of physical activity in very old people?

Methods: Seventy-six participants (55.3% women) with a mean age of 84.4 ± 3.8 years wore accelerometers for ≥ 5 consecutive days, and completed the IPAQ-E 80 +. Spearman's rho and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the validity of IPAQ-E 80 + against accelerometer measures. Analyses were conducted for the separate items sitting, laying down at daytime and nighttime, walking, moderate to vigorous (MV) walking, and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and the summary measures: total inactive time, sedentary time (i.e. lying down at daytime + sitting), total active time, and total MVPA + MV walking.

Results: The IPAQ-E 80 + correlated with the accelerometer measures of total inactive- (r = 0.55, p < 0.001), sedentary- (r = 0.28, p = 0.015), walking- (r = 0.54 p < 0.001) and total active- (r = 0.60, p < 0.001) times, but not with measures of intensity of walking or physical activity; MV walking (r = 0.06, p = 0.58), MVPA (r = 0.17, p = 0.13).

Significance: In this study the IPAQ-E 80 + showed fair to substantial correlations with accelerometers, and it therefore seems able to rank very old people according to levels of PA (total inactive-, sedentary-, and total active time, and walking time). The IPAQ-E 80 + seems promising for use in studies investigating associations between activity behavior and health in this population. Further investigation is needed to determine whether the IPAQ-E 80 + can accurately measure PA intensity.

Loneliness and dementia are common among very old (aged ≥ 80 years) people, but whether the prevalence of loneliness differs between very old people with and without dementia is unknown and few studies have investigated associated factors. The aims of the present study were to compare the prevalence of loneliness between people with and without dementia in a representative sample of very old people, and to investigate factors associated with loneliness in the two groups separately. This population-based study was conducted with data on 1176 people aged 85, 90, and ≥ 95 years (mean age 89.0 ± 4.47 years) from the Umeå 85 + /Gerontological Regional Database study conducted in northern Sweden, during year 2000–2017. Structured interviews and assessments were conducted during home visits. Loneliness was assessed using the question “Do you ever feel lonely?.” Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with loneliness in participants with and without dementia. The prevalence of loneliness did not differ between people with and without dementia (50.9% and 46.0%, respectively; p = 0.13). Seven and 24 of 35 variables were univariately associated with the experience of loneliness in participants with and without dementia, respectively. In the final models, living alone and having depressive symptoms were associated with the experience of loneliness in both study groups. In participants without dementia, living in a nursing home was associated with the experience of less loneliness. These findings contribute with important knowledge when developing strategies to reduce loneliness in this growing age group.

Background: There is great need for development of feasible rehabilitation for older people with dementia. Increased understanding of this population’s experiences of rehabilitation participation is therefore important. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of community-dwelling older people with dementia participating in a person-centred multidimensional interdisciplinary rehabilitation program.

Methods: Sixteen older people with dementia were interviewed about their experiences of participation in a person-centred multidimensional interdisciplinary rehabilitation program. The program comprised assessments by a comprehensive team of rehabilitation professionals followed by a rehabilitation period of 16 weeks, including interventions based on individualized rehabilitation goals conducted with the support of the rehabilitation team. The rehabilitation was performed in the participants’ homes, in the community and at an outpatient clinic, including exercise with social interaction in small groups offered twice a week to all participants. The interviews were conducted at the end of the rehabilitation period and analysed with qualitative content analysis.

Results: The analysis resulted in one overarching theme: Empowered through participation and togetherness and four sub-themes: Being strengthened through challenges; Gaining insights, motives, and raising concerns about the future; Being seen makes participation worthwhile; and Feelings of togetherness in prosperity and adversity. The participants increased their self-esteem by daring and coping in the rehabilitation. The insights about themselves and their condition motivated them to continue with their prioritized activities, but also raised concerns about how the future would play out. Collaboration in the group and being seen and acknowledged by staff strengthened their own motivation and self-efficacy.

Conclusion: According to community-dwelling older people with dementia, a person-centred multidimensional interdisciplinary rehabilitation program was experienced as viable and beneficial. The participants seemed empowered through the rehabilitation and expressed mostly positive experiences and perceived improvements. Providers of interdisciplinary rehabilitation programs for this group should consider aspects raised by the participants e.g. the positive experience of being challenged in both exercise and daily activities; the importance of being seen and feeling secure; the benefits and challenges of collaboration with others in the same situation; and the generation of new perspectives of current and future situation.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to study changes in morale in individuals 85 years and older, and to assess the effect of negative life events on morale over a five-year follow-up period.

METHOD: The present study is based on longitudinal data from the Umeå85+/GERDA-study, including individuals 85 years and older at baseline (n = 204). Morale was measured with the Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale (PGCMS). Negative life events were assessed using an index including 13 negative life events occurring during the follow-up period. Linear regression was used for the multivariate analyses.

RESULTS: The majority of the sample (69.1%) had no significant changes in morale during the five-year follow-up. However, the accumulation of negative life events was significantly associated with a greater decrease in PGCMS. A higher baseline PGCMS score did not attenuate the adverse effect negative life events had on morale.

CONCLUSION: Morale seemed to be mainly stable in a five-year follow-up of very old people. It seems, nonetheless, that individuals are affected by negative life events, regardless of level of morale. Preventing negative life events and supporting individuals who experience multiple negative life events could have important implications for the care of very old people.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether higher morale, i.e. future-oriented optimism, at baseline was associated with lower risk of depressive disorders five years later among very old people.Methods The Umeå85+/GErontological Regional Database, a population-based study with a longitudinal design, recruited participants in Sweden and Finland aged 85, 90 and ≥95 years. The sample in the present study included 647 individuals (89.1±4.4 years (Mean±SD), range 85-103). After five years, 216 were alive and agreed to a follow-up (92.6±3.4 years, range 90-104). The Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale (PGCMS) was used to assess morale. The depressive disorder diagnosis was determined according to DSM-IV based on medical records and interview data including assessment scales for depressive disorders. A number of sociodemographic, functional and health-related variables were analysed as possible confounders.Results For those with no depressive disorders at baseline, the only baseline variable significantly associated with depressive disorders five years later was the PGCMS score. A logistic regression model showed lower risk of depressive disorders five years later with higher baseline PGCMS scores (odds ratio 0.779 for one point increase in PGCMS, p<0.001). The association remained after adjusting for social isolation (p<0.1 association with depressive disorders five years later).Conclusion Our results indicate that the higher the morale, the lower the risk of depressive disorders five years later among very old people. The PGCMS seems to identify those very old individuals at increased risk of depressive disorders five years later. Preventive measures could befocused on this group.

Aims: This study examined the prevalence of loneliness among the oldest old within a 10-year period and studied the influence of various sociodemographic, social and health characteristics on loneliness.

Methods: The study used population-based data from the Umea85+/GErontological Regional DAtabase-study (GERDA) for the years 2000-2002, 2005-2007 and 2010-2012 including 85-year-old, 90-year-old and 95-year-old participants. A final sample of 304 participants in 2000-2002, 329 participants in 2005-2007 and 401 participants in 2010-2012 was included in the analyses.

Results: Although the level of loneliness was already high in 2000-2002 (49.3% reported frequent loneliness), the results showed limited changes in loneliness during the 10-year study period. Loneliness was closely related to living alone, depressive symptoms and living in institutional settings.

Conclusions: Although societal changes such as solitary living and growing urbanization suggest a changing trend in loneliness, we found that the prevalence of loneliness was relatively stable in this study. Nevertheless, loneliness is common among the oldest old and a focus on social issues related to living arrangements and on depressive symptoms is important in understanding loneliness.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant treatment may increase the risk of death. The association between antidepressants and mortality has been evaluated in community-dwelling older people, but not in representative samples of very old people, among whom dementia, multimorbidity, and disability are common.

METHODS: Umeå 85+/GERDA study participants (n = 992) aged 85, 90, and ≥95 years were followed for up to five years. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to analyze mortality risk associated with baseline antidepressant treatment, adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS: Mean age was 89 years; 27% of participants had dementia, 20% had stroke histories, 29% had heart failure, and 16% used antidepressants. In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, antidepressant use was associated with a 76% increased mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-2.19). Adding adjustment for Geriatric Depression Scale score, HR was 1.62 (95% CI, 1.29-2.03). The association was not significant when adjusting for additional confounding factors (HR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.85-1.38). Interaction analyses in the fully adjusted model revealed a significant interaction between sex and antidepressant use (HR: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.05-2.94). Among male and female antidepressant users, the HRs for death were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.47-1.24) and 1.28 (95% CI, 0.97-1.70), respectively.

CONCLUSION: Among very old people, baseline antidepressant treatment does not seem to be independently associated with increased mortality risk. However, the risk may be different in men and women. This difference and the potential risk of initial treatment require further investigation in future cohort studies of very old people.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of a high-intensity functional exercise program on depressive symptoms among older care facility residents with dementia.

METHODS: Residents (n = 186) with a diagnosis of dementia, age ≥ 65 years, Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 10, and dependence in activities of daily living were included. Participants were randomized to a high-intensity functional exercise program or a non-exercise control activity conducted 45 min every other weekday for 4 months. The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) were administered by blinded assessors at baseline, 4, and 7 months.

RESULTS: No difference between the exercise and control activity was found in GDS or MADRS score at 4 or 7 months. Among participants with GDS scores ≥ 5, reductions in GDS score were observed in the exercise and control groups at 4 months (-1.58, P = 0.001 and -1.54, P = 0.004) and 7 months (-1.25, P = 0.01 and -1.45, P = 0.007). Among participants with MADRS scores ≥ 7, a reduction in MADRS score was observed at 4 months in the control group (-2.80, P = 0.009) and at 7 months in the exercise and control groups (-3.17, P = 0.003 and -3.34, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS: A 4-month high-intensity functional exercise program has no superior effect on depressive symptoms relative to a control activity among older people with dementia living in residential care facilities. Exercise and non-exercise group activities may reduce high levels of depressive symptoms.